"Secret U.S. government cables show a stunning willingness by senior Canadian officials to appease American demands (more here) for a U.S.-style copyright law here. The documents describe Canadian officials as encouraging American lobbying efforts. They also cite cabinet minister Maxime Bernier raising the possibility of showing U.S. officials a draft bill before tabling it in Parliament. The cables, from the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, even have a policy director for then industry minister Tony Clement suggesting it might help U.S. demands for a tough copyright law if Canada were placed among the worst offenders on an international piracy watch list. Days later, the U.S. placed Canada alongside China and Russia on the list." Unbelievable. Suddenly I understand why the SFPD had no qualms about acting as henchmen for Apple goons to violate someone's constitutional rights. If a government is messed up, it only makes sense this is reflected in the corporate policies of its prime corporations.

What's more, the police would get a warrant which a judge has to sign. Warrants issued are usually publicly disclosed.

Well, they showed up and ASKED if they could search his place. Is that against the law? IMHO, they did it WITH police escorts, so if laws were broken, probably more the fault of the police dept than Apple.

I swear, you guys act like Apple employees showed up at his house, announced themselves as the police (without the police actually being present), kicked down his door, and then ransacked his place while the dude was being restrained. Remember, he GAVE THEM PERMISSION to do the search.

Disclaimer: Before I am labeled an Apple fanboy, I do not own any of their products

I agree with your comment except that the police, according to their undisputed account, never entered the premises.

It is a rumor or alleged (by some look@me blogger!) that one of the Apple employees involved went to some effort to appear as though he was an active, onduty policeman (pretending to be one by say flashing a badge would be illegal) but then again it is also reported that he gave the owner of the property his Apple business card, so seems like the real story isn't quite clear.

It does involve the police. The police, by being present, lend authority to the proceedings, even if they stay on the side walk. The person who's house was searched knew that at least some of them were police. I don't think its unreasonable to assume that the person wouldn't ordinarily let strangers in to search his house on request. He did it because of the police presence. By being there they become part of the situation whether or not that actively do anything. As police officers, they have a duty to uphold the law. Did they inform the house owner of his right to not be searched? I think its fairly clear they were the muscle and the whole point was to get into the house without a warrant.